Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: cashel Date: Jul 7, 2004 7:01pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

yes.. My MPEG4 download had distorted(unitelligible) sound and I only got about 40 minutes of video

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffForrest O. Date: Jul 7, 2004 7:22pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

You would have more luck with the original MPEG-1 files, which are also available via ed2k and other p2p networks. But I still think archive.org should get rid of this release ASAP.

This post was modified by Forrest O. on 2004-07-08 02:22:48

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Smelter Date: Jul 7, 2004 11:28pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

micheal moore is incouraging non-comercial file sharing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffForrest O. Date: Jul 7, 2004 11:30pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

Which might make it not immoral, but archive.org's hosting the file is still illegal. I don't want anything bad to happen to the Internet Archive, so I believe they should take the files down yesterday.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: MarcoEsc Date: Jul 8, 2004 7:51am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

whatever "micheal moore" may or may not be "incouraging", the Internet Archive should not be hosting incomplete bootleg copies of current feature films. Whatever Moore's opinion of copyright law, his endorsement of downloading in a public talk is NOT explicit permission to host a current feature film here.

Frankly, whoever uploaded this film flat out lied when they said they had permission to put it here. Though I agree that it's interesting that the film's page has not been removed from the Archive. (Note you can no longer download the file.)

Uploading pirated media (or media for which you do not have the permission to share) puts the Internet Archive at serious risk.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: movie boi Date: Jul 9, 2004 6:32am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

Besides it not just Michael Moore. He does not have complete rights to this film. The company setup by Miramax, the distributors, and the charities yet to be disignated by Disney all have commercial interests in this movie that Michael Moore cannot give away.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: uniQ Date: Jul 10, 2004 7:07pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Shouldn't you get rid of F911?

Regardless of the legality, if IA wants to host this, they should @ least get a decent copy. Everyone seems to be saying it's a poor one...

-uniQ

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffJ.B. Nicholson-Owens Date: Jul 11, 2004 6:38am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Where else is quality an showstopper issue?

I'm not aware of any policy for archive.org that makes a judgement based on percieved quality. I would argue that any audio transcoded from a lossy encoder is a poor quality copy and should be at least noted so people have a chance to download the best quality copy. Archive.org doesn't note the lineage of all the audio files so one can do this for themselves. But if the quality issue is the stopper, wait for a DVD rip.

I would say a lack of a proper license (Michael Moore and Lion Gate Film's sentiment should not be enough) should be far more troubling than the quality issue.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or Staffsimon c Date: Jul 11, 2004 12:07pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Where else is quality an showstopper issue?

Actually, worth noting - although we don't yet show it on download pages (but are looking at that), we keep a track of which of the files is the original, and therefore highest quality of the ones uploaded:

http://ia200029.eu.archive.org/petabox/items/hda6/movies/night_of_the_living_dead/night_of_the_living_dead_files.xml

If you look in this XML, you'll see that the type is set as 'derivative' for those files that have been derived from the original. This is clearly going to be important in the future, so we do try to keep track of it.

Thanks,
s!

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)